Posts published by Jules Witcover

That great pipe-puffing philosopher of the Nixon presidency, John Mitchell, once famously observed: “Watch what we do, not what we say.” In other words, forget the rhetoric and pay attention to the more telltale actions of what eventually became a disgraced administration.

Mitchell’s counsel can be instructive in assessing most presidencies, in which their guiding ideologies, carefully laid down in position papers and speeches, are sometimes carried forth in action, and sometimes not.

The most successful administrations are those in which their principles set a general course but not a restricting road map for achieving a president’s objectives. For example, Ronald Reagan talked often about fiscal restraint but yielded to tax increases when pragmatic advisers persuaded him they were required, and never seemed to get blamed for doing so.

His successor in the Oval Office, the senior George Bush, was hardly a rigid ideologue but he played one on television and in speeches designed to mollify the Republican right wing. Unlike Reagan, he got caught in the ideological trap with in his memorable “read my lips, no new taxes” speech accepting the party’s 1988 presidential nomination.

Bush subsequently went back on the pledge, outraging the G.O.P. faithful and severely undercutting his reelection hopes in 1992. At the same time, he was also castigated repeatedly for not having what he called “the vision thing.”Read more…

The first important decision any president makes comes well before taking office: his choice of a running mate at the time of his own presidential nomination, or even before. Presidential nominations now are all but assured well in advance of the party conventions.

With the prominence of Dick Cheney as a key policy adviser to President Bush, the old argument that the vice president is a heartbeat away from the presidency is only part of the imperative for making a wise selection. If the Cheney pattern is to be followed in future years, a president will want a strong partner, not merely a silent butler.

But considering the controversy swirling around Cheney’s powerful role, the next president might well choose to do what some others have done — pick a nobody, or a weak figure who will not pose any threat to his own power and spotlight. George W. Bush’s father did that in 1988, by intent or not, in choosing Sen. Dan Quayle, who soon became the brunt of unkind vice-presidential jokes.

Presidential nominees always mouth the cliché that they looking for the running mate most qualified to occupy the Oval Office if fate should so dictate. But they don’t seem to give much thought to picking a highly capable lieutenant who can help govern while waiting. Many vice presidents have been left with little of real significance to occupy them or prepare them for the presidency.